You know me, far be it from me to want to start any trouble or stir the pot. In that regard, I decided to do a bit more research on the who-can-vote thing.
I fired up the old computer, and started researching. It turns out that our state is not really clear on the issue. I went to our town clerk this morning, and it is he who needs to approve of these things, and he reached for the phone and called a lawyer at the state house. No answer yet on if 1) Pearlsky can, in fact, vote or 2) if Pearlsky should be a registered voter even if she cannot legally vote.
BUT, WAIT, there’s more …
I learned about lots of other states … and here are some of my favorites. Note, these are honest to goodness quotes … you can’t make this crap up.
ARKANSAS: “No “idiot” or “insane” person shall be entitled to the privileges of an elector.” ARK. CONST. art. 3, § 5. (Ed. Note: Wow, hold on, then how did Bush win there?)
COLORADO: No Constitutional disqualification provision. “Right to vote is not lost because of confinement in a state institution for persons with mental illness.” COLO. REV. STAT. § 1-2-103(5).
ILLINOIS: No disqualification statute. “Every patient of any hospital or mental institution in this State shall be deemed a resident of the town, city, village or election district or precinct in which he resided next prior to becoming a patient of such hospital or mental institution. However, the term “hospital” does not include skilled nursing facilities.” IL ST CH 10 § 5/3-4. (Ed. Note: Is that because skilled nurses are idiots?)
KENTUCKY: “ “Idiots” and “insane” persons shall not have the right to vote.” KY. CONST. § 145(3).
MISSISSIPPI: “ “Idiots” and “insane” persons are not qualified electors.” MISS. CONST. art. 12, § 241. (Ed. Note: But they are qualified electees).
PENNSYLVANIA: No Constitutional disqualification provision. “Subject to state law, anyone who is over twenty one, has been a citizen of the United States for at least one month, and has resided in the state and county for the specified time may vote.” PA. CONST. Art. 7, § 1.
VERMONT: “To be entitled to the privilege of voting, persons must be of “quiet and peaceable behavior.” ” VT.CONST. ch. II, § 42.
Guardianship update. Remember how I explained that once Pearlsky (or ANY child) turns 18, she is fully emancipated? As of that day, she is considered an adult and no medical information can be shared with me (not from her doctors, school nurses, anyone) (blame HIPAA), her school will not share academic information with me, etc. This is real, make sure you understand this for your family. I have discussed this with our doctors and our hospital and with other hospitals (really, a whole other post) and plain and simple, they will not tell me results of tests, will not confer with me, etc. Very scary. Alas, I may have legal guardianship next week and this will be moot, for us.
Two days ago I get an email from the hospital web system that allows me to log in and see her appointments and a good deal of medical information.
Your child/dependent will soon be turning 18 years old; as of that date, you will no longer have access to his/her account. In order for your child/dependent to access the account, you must update our records with your child/dependent’s personal email address.
OK, I can play along. I get Pearlsky a gmail account, and being the non-troublemaker that I am, I get a user name that no one will dare type without cringing. I enter it into the account, and guess what happens?
All my access to the account is blocked. A warning come up that says …
You cannot access this account. If you are a legal guardian, you must submit proof to the accounts administrator.
Eh. She doesn’t need any medical care anyway. Besides, I bet she wants to live in Vermont …